Interestingly enough, when I read that uniquely inked page, I did not even notice the word “ALWAYS” until the third or fourth sentence down. I disagree that the smudged ink represents a lost identity. I think it reminds her of an identity she reluctantly carries during this period in history. She forgets her color, unless placed in an exc…[Read more]

Ancestry is a central feature of both works. Ancestry is something you are born into, nothing something you can chose. The Skinhead choses to blame his own faults and mistakes, such as his inability or unwillingness to work due to the loss of three of his fingers, on his American ancestry. However, I believe he is making a mistake in doing so. He…[Read more]

Tackling this work is difficult because the narrator has a tendency to jump from topic to topic. If I am understanding his style correctly, Perelman wants us to analyze the emotions each line evokes rather than the words themselves. Oftentimes, emotion does not always flow consistently. If the narrator is indeed in love, he would experience a wide…[Read more]

In addition to racism, I think Lorde is also protesting her reaction to the racism and the mistreatment of blacks. Rather than raise awareness of these injustices, the speaker seems to turn away from these issues. Although she describes the murdered African Americans, she describes the narrator and her friend as “leaving their dead behind t…[Read more]

Sylvia Plath’s poems, “Full Fathom Five” and “Daddy” are both deeply personal poems which examine Plath’s relationship with her father. Clearly, many unresolved issues exist between the Plath and her father, creati […]

While reading “Full Fathom Five,” it seemed that this poem was more descriptive, describing her father’s features and other things noticeable to the outside world, while “Daddy,” a more personal name given to a father, is her description of this more personal relationship of a father and daughter. In the first poem she describes her father as being older, with “white hair, white beard, far-flung” (4) and also describes him as defying godhood. In her second poem, she says, “I never could talk to you” (24) and “I have always been scared of you” (51), descriptions that are on more of a personal level between her and her father, and are things that the outsider might not realize about their relationship. I am not sure if the speaker is simply afraid of her father, and this is their relationship, or if she feels this way out of respect for her father.

After reading “Full Fathom Five” a second time, something I kept noticing was the narrator constantly describing how tremendous this old man is, but that it wasn’t necessarily a good thing. I agree with Rani that the father was “overpowering her” and that could be seen from the tone of how this narrator was in awe and fear all at once. Also, the use of enjambment shows the uncomfortable nature of the speakers relationship to her father. “Daddy” carries a similar tension based on the tone, but not fully the same. There is clear empowerment from the father by comparing him to the Nazis and the speaker to a Jew, but this tone is less of fear and more of fighting back and staying strong.

I think the relationship the speaker has with her father is a fearing one out of respect. In “Full Fathom Five” Plath describes the father as an “old man”, older people are usually respected for their wisdom. Plath gives descriptions like a god coming from the sea which also makes the speaker feel belittled. The god has with “white hair” symbolizing old age and wisdom. In “Daddy” Rani explained how “she seems to compare their relationship to that of Hitler and the Jews.” This is definitely an extreme but it gets the job done effectively of Plath showing the extent to which she fears and respects her father. As much fear and respect for her father she still writes in the last line “daddy, daddy, you bastard, I’m through.” This shows how the fear and respect she has was forced, that she felt obligated to respect her father but in reality did not really respect him.

In reading these two poems I believe that the negative aspects of this interesting relationship between Plath and her father far outweigh the good ones. The Nazi imagery is very powerful, much more so than the positive imagery used. Additionally, in “Full Fathom Five” I interpreted the line about breathing water as a negative. She is saying that the air is no good but clearly for a human to drink water is suicide, highlighting the negativity she feels towards her father.

Plath’s relationship seems to be a very complicated one. From reading both poems, I would say that Plath wants to be close with her father and has some amount of affection towards him. However, the negative aspects of their relationship seem to almost consume what good there is. Plath calls her father by a casual and endearing term “Daddy” instead of father which is much more formal. In her poem “Daddy,” Plath says “I use to pray to recover you” (14). In line 47, Plath mentions she has a picture of him and later says “At twenty I tried to die and get back, back, back to you” (53-54). This shows that Plath still has a longing to connect to her father. The repetition of the word back seems like an increase in time. This works as if Plath is implying she does not want to go back to the Father as he was before he died but rather the father of her early years. Plath almost seems haunted by her father in the sense of the contrast between the longing for him and the harsh descriptions of him such as “the vampire who said he was you” (67) and “you bastard” (75). Rani points out “By drawing a parallels between Hitler and the Jews and she and her father, she implies that her relationship with her father is oppressive and cruel.” I strongly agree with this. I also think that the parallels show just how strong of a disconnect there is between Plath and her father.

I definitely agree with everything that you’ve stated. This relationship with her father is complicated, confusing, and ambiguous. I was equally as confused by the fact that Plath calls her father “daddy” as opposed to her father, or her dad. Perhaps because her father died when she was young, she might have been able to identify with him more if she called him the same name that she used as a little girl. In lines 8 and 9 she states, “Marble-heavy, a bag full of God, Ghastly statue with one gray toe”. This image in itself holds a very grave meaning. Marble heavy refers to a gravestone, and a bag full of God could refer to a body bag. She might feel that the human skin is a body bag containing our souls. More importantly, Plath references God, and it is unclear if she has a positive connation of God or a negative connotation of God. Maybe she felt like her father was a sort of God, or that he possessed that much power over her.

I agree with your observation that her father was oppresive and cruel towards her. The Hitler connection is definitely there, and she also compares him to a devil multiple times in the poem. Her father died when she was young, ‘I was ten when they buried you,’ (Daddy) and he caused all of this pain that stuck with her afterwards. Even though the relationship was obviously not good, it is clear that she overcomes this struggle by the end of “Daddy” with the last line being ‘Daddy, daddy, you bastard, I’m through.’ This combined with the fact that it is title the endearing term Daddy, as opposed to a more formal father, seems to be that she has resolved their relationship and no longer lets it keep her down.

I agree with Rani that the man in “Full Fathom Five,” her father, is “domineering” and “overpowering.” However, Rani mentions one point that I disagree with. She says that the line “this thick air is murderous. I would rather breathe water,” is saying that “the speaker is willing to suffer under abnormal environmental conditions just to further her relationship with her father.” I disagree. I think that what the line is really saying is that humans survive by breathing, yet the air around her is so poisonous that breathing it in would have the same effect on her that breathing water would have – she would die.

Plath establishes the “I” and the apostrophe of her father very distinctly and opposite to one another, alienating herself from every aspect of what represents or is reminiscent of her father’s presence. She very obviously feels victimized, if not intimidated by, her father, which she had at one point considered a deified figure. This is interesting because it hints at a break in trust between the two, one which devastated Plath deeply. Plath describes the relationship as a power struggle, where she feels heavily oppressed, “tongue stuck in [her] jaw” (25). She seems to hint at a never-ending search for her father’s approval in other male figures, specifically in her husband, the “vampire who said he was you” (72).

Throughout Part I, Ginsberg is describing the unfortunate deterioration of the greatest minds of his generation. While he keeps a uniform structure throughout a majority of the work by beginning each line with “who”, he breaks this structure toward the end of the work. I agree that Ginsberg does so in order to draw attention to those lines. He des…[Read more]

It seems to me that Ginsberg is describing the “best minds of his generation” (1) as victims of circumstance. They seem to be living these lives of extreme hardship, subject to their environment. He describes them as “starving hysterical minds”. One can interpret this in multiple ways. For example, one can take his words literally and assume…[Read more]

I think that O’Hara considers his method of poetry and Goldberg’s method of painting equal, yet producing distinct products. While O’Hara’s poetry relies more on verbal interpretations, Goldberg’s painting depends on visual interpretations. I agree that the original sardines of Goldberg’s painting served as the muse for his new painting, h…[Read more]

In my opinion. Hughes makes a convincing argument for the white man’s future regret. He supports his claim to equality by asserting that “I too, am America” (18). When whites realize their extreme mistreatment of African Americans, they will surely be ashamed of their actions. According to Hughes, their ignorance and inability to see past incon…[Read more]

Stein often repeats the same phrase using varying forms of syntax throughout the work. In my opinion, she uses this inimitable syntax to address Picasso within the confines of their friendship. Picasso strove to explore new mediums of art and revolutionize the artistic community though his creation of cubism. Cubists cast away the conventional…[Read more]

In my opinion, the fly is meant to represent the many distractions of life. Rather than using her final moments to enjoy the company of her loved ones and marvel at her life, the speaker becomes so distracted by this fly. The narrator keeps noticing him fly around the room. Dickinson means for the fly to represent the manner in which people…[Read more]

Using poetic devices such as internal rhyme and anaphora, Poe tells a fairly straight forward account of a man’s encounter with a “Stately” raven (VII 45). At the start of the work, the man is already on edge due t […]

The raven only says one line in the entire poem, and this is the word “nevermore.” If the raven is only allotted one word to say, then this is the perfect one. It seems that this word can answer many different questions that the speaker has. It can be an answer to his question of if he will see Lenore again. The raven is coming to finally solve this- he says, “nevermore” which means that she is long gone. The fact that this repeated word is making the speaker mad shows that he will never be able to remove the grief that he has for her. The last line, “and my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor shall be lifted—nevermore!” also shows that the narrator is accepting of his current, miserable state.

I do agree with the idea of the narrator’s deteriorating mental state as a main subject of the poem. Specifically, when the raven lands upon “a bust of Pallas” (VII.48), I interpreted this as an apparent symbol for the disintegration of the narrator’s sound state of mind; the correlation between the representation of death manifested in the form of the raven, and the purposeful placement of a bust of Athena, the goddess of intelligence, seemed clever and subtle to me. However, I disagree that the repetition of the phrase “nevermore” is what drives the narrator into madness, but that the raven’s answer of “nevermore” assert that the narrator will never find peace of mind or “respite and nepenthe” (IVX.96) from the memories of his lover, and that he will never know peace in Heaven, referenced in line 104.

I think the meaning of “nevermore” reflects the speaker’s own self fulfilling prophecy. He seems transfixed on the Raven’s reply even when it is obvious what the Raven’s reply will be over time. The Raven doesn’t say anything other than Nevermore. The entire scene is artificially created by the speaker. He inserts “Lenore” into the dialogue. He calls the The raven a prophet when it really himself that is prophesying his inability to be with her anymore. He projects a life onto the Raven, that he was the pet of some depressed owner. Then that he is talking about Lenore. And then that he is sent from hell. All the while, it is really the thought’s of the speaker that count and the “Nevermore” is irrelevant, because he will say this no matter what. I think this becomes clear in the ending: “And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be lifted—nevermore!”
Regardless of what the Raven does, he will never rise again. He places Himself in his own state, not the raven.

With the accompanying of the first person “I’s” and the constant frustration derived from the ravens nevermore presents a mind that is unstable. In Whitman’s “Song of Myself,” he speaks with a tamed stable voice; he establishes his identity and his views. In “The Raven,” however, the constant repeating of “nevermore” drove the speaker to “[sit] engaged in guessing [having] no syllable expressing.” The identity is established, but the views are unstable so the line between reality and perspective cannot be found. The word nevermore seems to be associated with denial. The constant repetition of this word, as Debra says, “shows that he will never be able to remove the grief that he has for her.” However, I believe that denial is a double-edged blade and that it goes against the narrator accepting this state. It’s rather a giving-in to this state instead of an acceptance and that’s the self that “nevermore” presents.

I definitely was intrigued by this poem and it’s use of the word “Nevermore”. The speaker himself is going insane from the responses of the raven. I found myself feeling a little frantic too by the repetition of “Nevermore”. This raven’s remarks are very important. “Startled at the stillness broken by reply so aptly spoken, ‘Doubtless,’ said I, ‘what it utters is its only stock and store Caught from some unhappy master whom unmerciful Disaster” (Lines 72-74). The speaker makes it obvious that he knows the raven does not speak wisdom but it still manages to manipulate and frustrate him. The raven also serves a very important purpose because it answers questions that the man already knows the answers to. I find it very cleaver that Edgar Allen Poe chose to use a bird, because if the raven were depicted as a human being he would obviously be able to answer the questions that the man is asking. This idea that the author is asking these questions that he knows the answers to, really illustrates his self-torture. I also that that it was very interesting when the raven decides to land on “Pallas”, because now suddenly the author is lead to the conclusion that the raven does possess wisdom.